Re: versioned libraries dependencies
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 10:24:28AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 10:07:34AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Yes, here we are speaking about _build-dependencies_, and i have thought
> > a bit more bout it, and it seems to me that this is really only needed
> > in build dependencies, and thus only for the -dev packages (for build
> > dependencies).
> Uhm, no the problem is not only for build dependencies, but also for
> normal dependencies.
> Example: pxp build-depends on netstring, rebuilding netstring with a
> different interface will cause pxp to become unusable. Even if pxp has
> the right build dep on an old version of netstring installed pxp package
> doesn't violate dependencies.
> I want that a new version of netstring will be uninstallable
> contemporary to a version of pxp built against a different netstring
> This is really similar to the virtual ocaml-3.06 package, we have both
> build-dependencies on ocaml-3.06 _and_ normal dependencies on
<... rest snipped ...>
Ok, yes, sure, i was thinking in the case of debian packages only,
Sure, we should have both a build and a normal dependency, but only for
libraries, for apps, there would only be a build dependency (as normal,
maybe unversioned), and a dependency on the the versioned .so package.
> Regarding the .so I've still to finish reading Sven's mail ...
Ok, take your time, i think this one is ok, altough we could see if we
could make use of some kind of so version in the libraries.